Tag Archive 'scientific method'

Mystifying science, and scientific mysticism

Edgar Cayce used to say that it is possible to connect with any source of knowledge when our consciousness is expanded to the extent that it can render the Akashic records transparent. In the Eastern mystic tradition as well the access to universal knowledge is a stage which can manifest in the awareness of a person during the evolution of his spiritual path.

In the West, the subject who knows has been separated from the object of knowledge, especially since the introduction of Descartes’ method where the scientist had to separate his subjectivity from the object of research. Modern science, being based on the reproducibility and objectivity principles which are fundamental to Newton’s world of physics, led to an enormous technical and scientific development but doesn’t have the tools to understand awareness, the soul, the psyche itself, or existence. The problem of consciousness which is nagging the neurosciences seems to be elusive to the research method which negates any role for the inner life.

Subjectivity in science has such a marginal role that it became a taboo, so much so that Alan Wallace even wrote The Taboo of Subjectivity (Oxford University Press, 2000). He affirms that through scientific materialism people became convinced that scientists have knowledge about the mind when actually they are ignorant about it, and that non-scientists do not know what they actually know perfectly. Since for science subjective opinions are fallible by definition, it seems that everything that is intuition or perspicacity does not have value if not backed by data and objective procedures.

Comte, the father of positivism, affirming that what could not be observed and measured was to be considered unreal, put the basis for the digitalization of the human being, where intelligence became a number of IQ and human qualities became DNA sequences. Science expanded itself to the point of including areas pertaining to wisdom.

Descartes’ little “Spirits”

Though Descartes is considered the father of rationality and of the modern scientific method, in his researches he was a philosopher and sometimes a mystic. The religious aspect was a kind of partial compromise for pandering to the ecclesiastic hierarchies of his time, but his method of investigation was still anchored to inner analysis and to philosophy, besides scientific objectivity.

Science, not having modern research instruments then, was integrated with the investigation methodologies that rested upon cosmology, religion, and philosophy, among other sources of knowledge.

It is known that Descartes considered the pineal gland as a bridge between the immortal soul and the mortal body.